Challenging identity hierarchies: Gender and consociational power-sharing
| Author | Ronan Kennedy,Jennifer Thomson,Claire Pierson |
| Published date | 01 August 2016 |
| Date | 01 August 2016 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1369148116647334 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
The British Journal of Politics and
International Relations
2016, Vol. 18(3) 618 –633
© The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1369148116647334
bpi.sagepub.com
Challenging identity
hierarchies: Gender and
consociational power-sharing
Ronan Kennedy1, Claire Pierson2
and Jennifer Thomson3
Abstract
Consociational democracy has become the most influential paradigm in the field of power-
sharing institutional design and post-conflict peacebuilding. Consociation institutes representation
for certain formerly excluded groups. However, it simultaneously inhibits effective political
representation for groups that do not align with the societal divisions that consociation seeks
to accommodate, specifically the ‘additional’ cleavage of gender. Given the extensive use of the
consociational model as a peacebuilding tool in divided states and the growing awareness of the
disproportionate negative effect of conflict on women, there is a surprising lack of consideration
of the effect that consociational power-sharing has on women’s representation. This article
considers the specific impact that the consociational model has on women’s representation. We
argue that because gender is an integral factor in conflict, it should therefore be integral to post-
conflict governance. With empirical reference to contemporary Northern Ireland, it is illustrated
that consociationalism is a ‘gender-blind’ theory.
Keywords
consocationalism, gender, Northern Ireland, post-conflict, power-sharing
… the problem was the way we posed the problem.
(What Is a Woman? Toril Moi, 2001: 119)
Introduction
As practically deployed in peace agreements in Northern Ireland, Lebanon, Macedonia
and Bosnia-Herzegovina, among others, consociational power-sharing is increasingly
1University College Dublin, Ireland
2Manchester Metropolitan University, UK
3Queen Mary University of London, UK
Corresponding author:
Jennifer Thomson, School of Politics and International Relations, Queen Mary University of London, Mile End
Road, London E1 4NS, UK.
Email: j.c.thomson@qmul.ac.uk; jennifercthomson@gmail.com
647334BPI0010.1177/1369148116647334The British Journal of Politics and International RelationsKennedy et al.
research-article2016
Article
Kennedy et al. 619
relied upon in the development of post-conflict governmental structures. Yet, despite this
positive global reception, consociational government is not without its faults. While
encouraging representation along ethnic or religious lines, it simultaneously inhibits
effective political representation for those whose primary political identities do not align
with the societal divisions it seeks to ameliorate. With ethno-national identity dominating
this framework for conflict resolution, there is little space for any other understanding of
identity or difference. Equality of representation and the ensuing legitimacy of political
institutions are framed within the ethno-national paradigm. This article explores how
identities ‘other’ than ethno-nationalism fit into consociational government, specifically
addressing how power-sharing impacts women’s political representation.
The consociational model has extensive use as a peacebuilding tool in divided
states (Taylor, 2009; Wilson, 2010). Simultaneously, there is a growing awareness of
the disproportionate negative effect of conflict on women (Meintjes et al., 2001; Ní
Aoláin, 2006). The dearth of literature that examines the effect that consociational
power-sharing has on women’s representation is thus surprising. The work that has
been produced has developed largely from comparative, ‘real-life’ examples (Byrne
and McCulloch, 2012; Rebouche and Fearon, 2005) and from within considerations of
the global Women, Peace and Security agenda, most clearly typified in United Nations
Security Council Resolution 1325 (UNSCR 1325) (Byrne and McCulloch, 2012). As
such, it has engaged less with consociational theory per se. Although we anchor our
argument here in the empirical case of contemporary Northern Ireland, we are more
concerned to address the conceptual misalignment between gendered understandings
of conflict and the consociational model as a means to create a stable peace. Like
Byrne and McCulloch, we argue that ‘the problem begins at the level of theory’ (Byrne
and McCulloch, 2012: 566) and that the lack of consideration given to gender by con-
sociational theorists must be addressed in order to consider the inadequacies of the
theory itself.
This article thus facilitates an understanding of the specific impact that the consocia-
tional model has on women’s political representation (both descriptive and substantive).
It argues that consociationalism is a ‘gender-blind’ theory and thus an incomplete/inad-
equate solution to the ‘problem’ of conflict. We work from a basic argument, outlined in
the section ‘Gendering ethno-national conflict’, that all conflict is gendered and that
consociational prescriptions for post-conflict governance ignore this actuality. It is fur-
ther argued that consociation’s emphasis on formal political structures, and women’s
dominance in community or grassroots, as opposed to party politics, hinders their repre-
sentation. An overview of consociational theory, its development and its inattention to
issues of gender is then provided. We anchor our argument in contemporary Northern
Ireland, as a means of illustrating the ways in which post-conflict consociational govern-
ance in the province has hindered movement around women’s descriptive and substan-
tive representation.
Gendering ethno-national conflict
The lack of consideration given to gender in consociational theory is notable given the
stress that contemporary feminist scholarship has placed on the gendered nature of con-
flict, including ethno-national-based conflicts. Within feminist narratives of conflict, the
role of gender and patriarchy has been understood to be a primary cause of war (see for
example Reardon, 1996: 10). Considering conflict, Cynthia Enloe asks, ‘What if
To continue reading
Request your trial